On Monday, November 26, 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted a court filing accusing former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort of breaching their September plea agreement. According to Mueller’s team, “After signing the plea agreement, Manafort committed federal crimes by lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Special Counsel’s Office on a variety of subject matters, which constitute breaches of the agreement.” Manafort was supposed to cooperate with the investigation as a plea deal condition. The special counsel didn’t provide specifics on what Manafort lied about or what evidence they have on it. But the fact the filing specifically mentioned lying among those crimes suggests that Mueller’s team will hit Manafort with more charges. Nonetheless, these lies concerned Manafort’s contacts with Trump administration officials, a suspected Russian spy Konstantin Kilimnik, a separate Justice Department investigation, and a wire transfer. While most of the document is redacted, the report states, “A review of documents recovered from a search of Manafort’s electronic documents demonstrates additional contacts with Administration officials” well into 2018. Mueller doesn’t hint who.

After his trial conviction, Paul Manafort’s flip seemed like a major turning point in the Trump-Russia investigation. For a time, it seemed that Robert Mueller had a cooperator with close ties to Donald Trump and Russia. However, that cooperation didn’t pan out. Though Wired states that he did testify to a grand jury weeks before the plea deal fell apart. So Mueller’s team is using his testimony as part of a criminal case against someone else.

But is this worse news for Robert Mueller or Paul Manafort? On one hand, it’s possible Mueller badly needed Manafort’s testimony or other information to make a larger case. But now that possibility has gone up in flames. Yet, maybe Mueller didn’t need Manafort much after all. Since he might’ve got much of the information he wanted elsewhere.
On the other hand, considering the consequences Paul Manafort will face for breaching his plea deal, you have to wonder why he’d lie to investigators. Is he still banking on a presidential pardon from Donald Trump as his best chance of a Get Out of Jail Free Card? After all, Trump has refused to rule that out and even praised him after his conviction for his Ukranian shenanigans. However, keep in mind that just because Trump expects loyalty from his associates doesn’t mean he’ll reward it. This is especially if that person is in trouble and makes him look bad.

Nonetheless, on Friday December 14, 2018, Vox reported that Paul Manafort provided advice to Donald Trump and several senior White House officials on the FBI’s Russia investigation during the Trump administration’s earliest days. According to government records and interviews, Manafort gave guidance on how to undermine and discredit the FBI’s inquiry into whether Trump, his campaign aides, and his family members conspired with the Russian government and its intelligence services to covertly defeat Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. While the White House knew about him being under investigation. In addition, Manafort gave advice on how to discredit witnesses against him and Trump.

First, Paul Manafort advised Donald Trump and his allies to move aggressively and attack the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies investigating the Trump administration. The former campaign chairman wanted nothing less than to “declare a public relations war on the FBI,” according to one of Vox’s anonymous sources as well as “delegitimize” the investigation itself. He also wanted to discredit then-FBI director James Comey and other senior FBI officials since they had become increasingly likely witnesses against Trump. Trump did just that though it’s unclear what role Manafort’s advice played into his attacks. Because Trump isn’t a man who takes advice. Besides, other more influential advisers recommended him to do the same thing. Not to mention, Trump didn’t really need to hear any guidance from Manafort or anyone else.

Through an intermediary, Paul Manafort advised a senior Trump administration official to attack the Justice Department, the FBI, and Obama administration officials for seeking court-authorized FISA warrants to eavesdrop on him and campaign aide Carter Page, as part of investigations and criminal investigations into whether they or others conspired with Russia to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election. Know that FISA warrants are granted when the court is presented with sufficient evidence that the potential target may be acting on behalf of a foreign power and there’s a high legal threshold in obtaining it. The Foreign Intelligence Service Court allowed for an electronic surveillance on Manafort before, during, and after his role in the Trump campaign. Donald Trump then alleged that then-President Barack Obama authorized wiretapping him and his campaign aides as part of an “illegal” espionage scheme. These allegations have since become central to Trump’s attacks to the Justice Department, FBI, and the Mueller investigation. Though Trump and his allies haven’t produced any evidence to show that any of this is true.

As part of these efforts, Donald Trump and his Capitol Hill allies made publicly sensitive classified information that endangered intelligence sources’ lives and interfered with ongoing criminal investigations. In May 2018, the Justice Department wrote to then House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Devin Nunes, warning him that information he was about to make public would, “risk severe consequences, including potential loss of human lives, damage to relationships with valued international partners, compromise of ongoing criminal investigations and interference with intelligence activities.” But Nunes released much of the information, anyway. While Trump ordered the declassification of other intelligence information that law enforcement and intelligence officials warned would do similar damage. Attacking the FISA warrants’ use didn’t affect the Manafort criminal case’s outcome. But by discrediting the FISA process and the federal investigation into him and other campaign aides, it’s politically more feasible for Trump to pardon him.

Second, for distraction and scapegoat purposes, Paul Manafort counseled the White House to allege that the pro-western Ukranian government had colluded with the Democratic National Committee to try to help Hillary Clinton win the 2016 election. Despite total lack of evidence to back up said charges, the White House adopted Manafort’s recommendation in the summer of 2017 to specifically target DNC strategist and consultant Alexandra Chalupa for allegedly working with Ukranian officials to hurt Donald Trump’s candidacy. Despite the torrent of allegations, no evidence has surfaced that the DNC or Chalupa did anything wrong. Acting on Manafort’s advice, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders encouraged reporters to investigate, “the Democrat National Committee coordinated opposition research directly with the Ukrainian Embassy.” That same week, conspiracy propagandist, professional Trump asskisser, and Fox News host Sean Hannity intensified the allegations evening after evening on his show. Likewise, Republicans on Capitol Hill called for investigations into the “Ukranian matter.” That late July, Trump tweeted: “Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump campaign – ‘quietly working to boost Clinton.’ So where is the investigation A.G.” In August 2017, Matthew Whitaker and a conservative advocacy group he then headed, the ironically named Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) formally asked the Federal Election Commission to investigate the DNC’s dealings with Chalupa. The FEC hasn’t given any indication that it’ll investigate the matter further. Mainly because they saw right through the ploy.

Even though the allegations were total bullshit, they were effective whatabout propaganda to the white conservative Fox News audience. The White House made claims shortly after the public disclosures that Donald Trump Jr. had hosted the infamous Trump Tower meeting between a self-described intermediary for the Russian government and himself, Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort, where the Russians promised “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. The White House tried drawing a parallel between its meetings with foreigners and the DNC’s via Alexandra Chalupa. But the comparison has always been a flimsy one. Since the White House and its surrogates couldn’t prove their counterparts did anything wrong. Not that lack of evidence didn’t stop them from pushing baseless conspiracy theories anyway. But Russia, a US enemy, engaged in a covert intelligence effort to influence the 2016 election’s outcome. Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort agreed to meet with individuals they knew were associated with the Russian government to get “dirt” on Clinton. Trump Jr. particularly acted on his dad and the Trump campaign’s behalf. Remember that it’s illegal for a campaign to accept help from a foreign individual, entity, or government. And it’s illegal not to disclose it. No wonder the meeting’s a focus in the Mueller investigation.

Fortunately, Alexandra Chalupa looked into Paul Manafort’s role as adviser to former Ukranian President Viktor Yanukovych, an authoritarian strongman who wanted to cut ties with the European Union and become more closely aligned with Russia. She then set out to sound the alarm. At one point, she even organized a protest in Manafort’s hometown of New Britain, Connecticut, with protestors holding signs saying, “Putin, hands off the US election.” But these endeavors had nothing to do with her work at the DNC, where she co-chaired DNC affiliate the National Democratic Ethnic Coordinating Counci during the 2016 presidential election. When Chalupa brought up Manafort with anyone at the DNC, they were uninterested. In July 2016, she left her DNC part-time consulting role to work full time in human rights advocacy. The DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign claimed they weren’t involved in Chalupa’s efforts, while no evidence has surfaced to contradict it.

Third, in early 2017, Paul Manafort provided the White House specific information on how Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign had sponsored research ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. Particularly, Manafort provided information to the White House on how to discredit the so-called Steele dossier, written by a former MI6 Russia desk head named Christopher Steele, about alleged ties that Donald Trump and his associates had to Russia. In fact, Manafort provided the background to the White House lawyers about specific allegations and information in the document that he claimed was suspect. Manafort recommended that Trump play up that the Clinton campaign had commissioned the work by a private investigation firm that they hired. In reality, the work on the Steele Dossier had been commissioned by a right-wing entity during the GOP primaries.

Paul Manafort’s contacts with the White House continued even after his cooperation with Robert Mueller. Without telling prosecutors, Manafort’s defense attorneys secretly provided details of their client’s cooperation with the special prosecutor to Donald Trump’s legal team, in another apparent effort Manafort engineered to undermine the investigation and/or win a Trump pardon. In the process, Manafort may have helped Trump tailor his answers to questions the special counsel’s office recently provided.

Former US attorney and deputy assistant attorney general told Vox: “The open pipeline between cooperator and suspect Trump may have been not on only extraordinary but also criminal. … What purpose other than an attempt to ‘influence, obstruct, or impede’ the investigation of the president can be discerned from Manafort’s service as a double agent? And on the Trump side, the communications emit a strong scent of illegal witness tampering.” In other words, in trying to cover up and obtain a presidential pardon Get-Out-of-Jail Free Card, Paul Manafort and others committed more crimes. Each “discernable lie” Manafort told is a potential new felony charge of lying to federal investigators, perjury, or obstruction of justice. Now what’s an obvious interest to Robert Mueller is whether others, most notably White House officials, conspired with Manafort to lie, mislead investigators, or commit obstruction of justice and what Donald Trump knew of all this.

There are times when moments you long wait for don’t always taste so sweet as you’d think they would be. On November 7, 2018, Donald Trump asked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to resign, ending the longtime Alabama senator’s nearly 2 years running the Department of Justice. Now you’d think this would be a good thing. After all, Sessions is so racist that Coretta Scott King wrote a letter to the US Senate not to confirm him as a federal judge during the 1980s. And as attorney general, Sessions pulled back federal oversight of local police departments. He’s moved to prosecute anyone who illegally crosses the US-Mexico border, regardless of the conditions they’re facing back home, while pushing immigration judges to take on more deportation cases. And he’s even rescinded previous limitations on harsh mandatory minimum prison sentences for low-level drug offenses, and asked prosecutors to consider the death penalty in some drug trafficking cases. Furthermore, Sessions was an early Trump ally and a true believer with his boss on practically every single issue the Justice Department oversees whether it’s policing, immigration, prisons, or voting rights, all of which make up key parts of Trumpism. And because he so much embodied Trumpism is why I am happy to see him go. And it’s deliciously ironic that Trump removed one of his most loyal foot soldiers, which could imperil many parts of Trump’s agenda.

However, despite how it’s a spectacular blow to Trumpism, we shouldn’t celebrate Jeff Sessions’ firing. In fact, we should be very alarmed by it since the reason for his ouster is quite scary. In Donald Trump’s eyes, the ousted attorney general committed an unforgivable sin and act of betrayal that saw his ouster as a long time coming. For months, Trump has expressed anger which has prompted repeated questions about how long the attorney general would last. After all, Sessions has previously offered to resign at least once, which Trump refused to accept. But he’s also become Trump’s punching bag who’s had to endure tons of abuse all because he recused himself from the probe into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, when it came out he had met with then- Russian ambassador to the US, Sergei Kislyak. This set the stage for the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein who has repeatedly declined to fire him even at Trump’s request. Trump has also complained that Sessions wasn’t sufficiently loyal because, since then he’s failed to prevent Mueller from indicting a growing number of Trump confidantes and targeting others. Trump’s anger also transferred another gripe that Sessions wouldn’t investigate connections between Hillary Clinton and Russia during the 2016 presidential campaign. And in February 2018, Trump complained that Sessions wouldn’t corroborate his unfounded belief in the existence of a widespread conspiracy theory, led by federal law enforcement personnel to undermine his candidacy during the 2016 presidential election. Because Trump believes that the FBI tricked the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) to surveil former campaign member, Carter Page, based on a Democrat-connected Steele dossier. Yet, none of this is true. For one, the FBI investigation into the Trump campaigns Russian connections began when Trump aide George Papadopoulos drunkenly bragged about getting Clinton dirt from the Russians to an Australian ambassador. Second, surveilling Page was justified with ample evidence beyond the so-called “Steele Dossier” and was renewed several times by appointed judges all appointed by GOP presidents and selected for FISC duty by Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts. Because they deemed the ongoing surveillance as fruitful. Now Mueller is currently investigating whether Trump’s alleged efforts to push Sessions out formed part of an endeavor to obstruct the probe, which would be a potentially criminal offense.

Now when a cabinet member resigns, you’d normally expect the Department No. 2 to take over in an acting capacity until a president hires a permanent replacement. In Sessions’ case, that should be Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. But Trump hates him since he’s overseeing the Mueller probe, has refused to fire Mueller, and doesn’t really care much about politics. So Trump tweeted that Sessions’ chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker would take over as acting DOJ head and will oversee the Mueller probe for the time being. Still, the fact he could either let Mueller do what he’s doing, curtail, or shut down the investigation should concern you. After all, Whitaker’s name cropped up in September as a replacement for Rosenstein when he appeared on the verge of getting fired himself. A former Iowa attorney, he’s the “eyes and ears” in the Justice Department, according to the New York Times. He’s also a fiscal and social conservative who unsuccessfully ran for the US Senate in 2014. Yet, what’s the most disturbing about Whitaker is that he was paid to sit on the advisory board of World Patent Marketing, which was ordered to pay a $26 million following federal legal action on allegations it tricked aspiring inventors into paying thousands of dollars to obtain patents and licensing deals for their inventions. As federal authorities noted, they “failed to fulfill almost every promise they make to consumers.” According to court filings, Whitaker received payments of $1,875 from the Florida-based company and sent a threatening email to a scam victim who complained to the Better Business Bureau, where he cited his former role as a federal prosecutor.

Still, why would Donald Trump tap in Matthew Whitaker as a temporary replacement for Jeff Sessions? Because while Whitaker aligns with Trump and Sessions on issues regarding crime and immigration, he comes with an added perk of having criticized the Mueller probe. In fact, Whitaker has expressed skepticism about the Mueller probe before joining the Trump administration as Sessions’ chief of staff in the fall of 2017. In August he wrote a CNN op-ed blasting the investigation which stated, “Mueller has come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election-meddling investigation that he is dangerously close to crossing. If he were to continue to investigate the [Trump family’s] financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, then this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel’s investigation was a mere witch hunt.” In July of that year, he appeared on CNN offering his own take on how an acting attorney general could sideline Mueller. He said, “I could see a scenario where Jeff Sessions is replaced with a recess appointment and that attorney general doesn’t fire Bob Mueller, but he just reduces his budget to so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt.” Beyond this Mueller scrutiny, Whitaker has publicly lambasted Hillary Clinton. While serving head of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, a right-leaning organization criticizing Democrats on ethics matters, Whitaker said in May 2017 that Clinton should be “extremely grateful” she wasn’t prosecuted for having a private email server. 3 months later, he wrote for The Hill that Clinton’s Ukraine connections were “worth exploring.” And let’s just say when a man dips into Clinton conspiracy theories, you know he shouldn’t be running the Justice Department.

But the truth is with Donald Trump firing Jeff Sessions and replacing him with loyalist Matthew Whitaker should literally scare the shit out of us. Indeed, Sessions was a terrible attorney general and an unapologetic racist sack of shit who’s been rolling back Americans’ civil rights. Granted, I don’t like the guy at all and part of me wants to feel glad to see him go. But while he’d do anything for Trump’s love, there were certain lines he wouldn’t cross. And it’s because Sessions wouldn’t cross them that he’s no longer attorney general. Nonetheless, Sessions’ firing should inspire the same surprise and anger on the level of May 2017’s James Comey firing as head of the FBI, which much of Washington treated as a serious crisis in American democracy. Because both cases have Trump nakedly assert power over an investigation’s direction while sacking people to block oversight into his own conduct.

However, this time, the panic is more muted. While Democrats and some Never Trumpers are objecting, Jeff Sessions’ firing doesn’t have the same earth-shattering impact the Comey firing did. And the fact Donald Trump has been signaling this move for awhile normalized it, routinized it, and made it thinkable. It probably didn’t help he did it the day after Democrats won control of Congress in the midterms. Yet, slowly but surely this is how the threat to American democracy has kept growing during the Trump era. Since actions once considered as inconceivable and abhorrent back in 2016 have become accepted parts of our everyday reality. They’re just facts of life in a country governed by Trump’s Republican Party.

As we know, the Robert Mueller investigation grew out of the firing of FBI Director James Comey as a way of protecting the Trump-Russia investigation from presidential interference. Since Day 1, Donald Trump has been raging against Jeff Sessions for recusing himself from the probe. In addition, he demanded that Sessions either take control of the investigation or resign and let someone else do it. Ever since then, Trump has repeatedly violated the norms of governing the way a president should treat an attorney general and the Justice Department. For Christ’s sake, he admitted that the Comey firing was about the Russia investigation on national television. He’s suggested that the attorney general’s job should be defending the president, not investigating him. He blasted the “Jeff Sessions Justice Department” for bringing charges against Republican members of Congress before the midterms because it might jeopardize Republican chances of holding onto the House. Individually, each of these shatters longstanding norms of how a president is supposed to think and act about the Department of Justice. Yet, it’s harder to muster outrage over each one individually. Though disturbing as these incidents are, no single one constitutes the end of American democracy, or even the DOJ’s independence. But even if these little norm violations don’t make a big difference by themselves, they cumulatively amount to a major change in how a president gets to treat an agency that’s supposed to be a check on his power. The same thing happened, in microcosm with Jeff Sessions’ firing. Trump’s berating of the attorney general in public, the insults, the humiliation weren’t enough to incite intense public outrage. But they served together to construct a new normal when it comes to a president’s relationship with an attorney general. By the time we got to the actual firing and replacement with a loyalist, it felt less like a novel event and more like an inevitable result of an ongoing process. And it’s this what makes Trump’s approach to firing Sessions such a worrying moment.

While it’s difficult to see how American democracy would collapse would look like in practice, Donald Trump’s firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions shows how democratic backsliding is possible. Since taking office in Hungary in 2010, President Viktor Orban spent the last 8 years setting up a system resembling democracy but isn’t actually one. He didn’t abolished elections, but gerrymandered parliamentary districts and seized control of the civil service administering elections. He didn’t ban the free press, but either bought up critical publications or forced them to sell to government-friendly allies. There was never a specific moment in time when you could say that Hungary wasn’t a democracy. It just evolved over time into something different and unfree. Same thing happened in Venezuela.

Nonetheless, Donald Trump’s firing of Attorney General Jeff Sessions is a serious threat to the health of American institutions. Even if acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker doesn’t fire Robert Mueller right away, it’s possible he could hamstring the probe behind the scenes with bureaucratic tools like refusing to approve Mueller’s indictments and subpoenas. Indeed, Whitaker has even floated the idea of cutting probe funding. He could run the same playbook of small fights over a major confrontation that helped him assume office without a huge public fuss.

Whether knowingly or not, Donald Trump is exploiting a weakness in the democratic immune system. Democracies depend on a motivated and involved public for their survival. But if politicians only take one small step away from democracy at a time, each one narrow enough to be justifiable by their political allies, then a systematic shift away from democracy and constraints on presidential power never ends up truly galvanizing the opposition. Since if you don’t give anyone a crisis point to rally around, you can get away with a lot. But the slow degradation of institutions and the normalization of an authoritarian approach to politics, makes any warning about a particular development seem out of proportion to the immediate threat. But let’s be honest about the big picture. Along with the public flagellation and eventually firing of Jeff Sessions, Trump’s approach to politics is damaging the foundations of American democracy. Though the Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives is certainly a good thing and will provide a check for Trump, the threats of American democracy can’t be solved with one election. Since they involve big structural problems like polarization of elites and politicians, growing hatred of the opposition party, deep emotional affiliation with one’s own party, and white anxiety over the loss of control over American politics and culture that’s driving authoritarian impulses and conservative polarization within White America and the Republican Party.

There are plenty of reason not to want Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh confirmed. He’s a conservative ideologue masquerading as a judge. He’s a corporate whore who thinks net neutrality violates the cable companies’ freedom of speech. And he’s ruled in favor of corporate power over democracy and the public interest on almost every kind of dispute you can think of. He won’t release 100,000 pages of documents relating to his work for the Bush administration in the 2000s. He’s perfectly fine with disabled people getting elective surgery against their will. He likens contraceptives to abortion inducing drugs which they’re most certainly not. He’s lied under oath on multiple occasions. He has gambling problems as his $200,000 credit card for debt for “baseball tickets.” And he believes that a president shouldn’t be indicted while in office. In sum, he’s a horrible Supreme Court pick in every conceivable way and has absolutely no business in ruling in critical matters that will affect American lives for decades to come.

Now as a Catholic liberal, I may have political misgivings on why Judge Kavanaugh shouldn’t sit on the bench of the US Supreme Court. Yet, most importantly is Kavanaugh’s history with women and his sexual assault allegations. Kavanaugh’s nomination seemed like moving ahead. The New Yorker published an explosive report about a letter California US Senator Dianne Feinstein sent to the FBI but was reluctant to discuss in public. Since she was worried the letter could expose Ford to partisan attacks. Written by a California psychology professor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, she said the announcement of Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court had spurred her recollection of a party encounter in high school where he held her down to a bed, ground against and groped her, attempted to remove her clothes, and tried to force himself on her, covering her mouth when she tried to scream. Finding it difficult to breathe, she thought Kavanaugh was accidentally going to kill her. Luckily, Ford escaped when Kavanaugh’s friend Mark Judge jumped on them and the all fell. She fled the room and locked herself in a bathroom until she heard the two boys go downstairs and their voices recede. Terrified she’d run into them and attack again, Ford ran out of the house. But the encounter was “a source of ongoing distress for her” as she remembered Kavanaugh and Judge laughing at her suffering. To put it in layman’s terms, Kavanaugh tried to rape her which has scarred her for life despite that she narrowly got away. This is a violent crime, not sexual misconduct. Though she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17 at the time in the 1980s, she doesn’t remember some key details such as the house they were in. She was on her way to the bathroom when Kavanaugh and Judge attacked and shoved her into a bedroom. Yet, she recalls that everyone had one beer while Kavanaugh and Judge had been drinking more heavily.

Christine Blasey Ford didn’t tell anyone about the allegations with anyone until 2012 during a couples therapy session with her husband. She first reached out to her representative, Rep. Anna Eshoo and directly contacted Feinstein’s office. After repeatedly discussing the matter with both offices, Ford decided not to go public.

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is certainly a hero in this case since her decision to go public with her sexual assault allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh led others to speak out. Here’s a tweet quoting Deborah Ramirez cheering her on.

On September 16, 2018, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford came forward in a Washington Post story. To corroborate her account, Ford provided the Post with a polygraph and session notes from her therapists from 2012. Though the therapist’s notes don’t name Kavanaugh, they record Ford’s claim being attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” Both her husband and a friend have confirmed her claims. He friend told the Los Angeles Times that he’s witnessed the lasting trauma affect her life and her struggle to come forward with him in early July. He claimed that Ford was averse to purchasing a master bedroom without a second exit. According to him, “Obviously, something happened that traumatized her so much that she’s afraid of being trapped.”

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford had nothing to gain from her testimony on Judge Brett Kavanaugh. For coming forward with sexual assault allegations against powerful men can lead result in losing career and reputation. Ford has received death threats. She’s had to take time off from her job. She and her family were forced out of her home. She’s had to shut down her social media. She’s had to fly all the way from her Bay area home to Washington, which terrified her. She’s had to use therapist notes and pass lie detector tests just to be believed. Not to mention, Republicans have refused to take her story seriously for craven selfish and partisan reasons. While many conservatives have attacked her as an anti-Trump activist whose motives and biases are as suspicious as her Northern California address. At her hearing, Ford had to recall as much as she could remember to come across as credible. As she had to retain her composure describing that painful memory she spent years trying to forget in front of white old men who don’t care what she has to say while feeling like she could fly into an unstoppable rage inside. Nonetheless, he gutting testimony was compelling as her expertise as in clinical psychology shone through her explanations on how trauma works.

Here’s Brett Kavanaugh’s 1982 yearbook entry from Georgetown Prep. It goes far from the Boy Scout image he’s tried to present at his hearing. More like a partying frat boy you’d want to punch in the face.

Nor is Dr. Christine Blasey Ford the only woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Shortly after she came forward, Deborah Ramirez told the New Yorker that in a drinking game during a 1983 dorm party at Yale, Kavanaugh exposed his genitals to her and shoved his penis to her face. All without Ramirez’s consent as she pushed him away. Not long after that, Michael Avenatti published an affidavit signed by Julie Swetnick who claimed attended a parties during high school where Kavanaugh plotted with friends to drug and “gang rape” girls. And that Kavanaugh was present she was gang raped at a party. Yet, she doesn’t explicitly say whether he participated. There are also plenty of witnesses who can corroborate on Ford and Ramirez. Two of Ramirez’s classmates can recall hearing about Kavanaugh’s indecent exposure, with one recalling several of the same details. His fraternity had a very shady reputation. In Ford’s case, aside from the therapist notes and polygraph tests, there’s even more evidence. Mark Judge’s memoir of his high school days at least recalls Kavanaugh’s underage drinking and partying. Kavanaugh’s high school calendar details numerous beach trips, parties with friends, and times he was “grounded.” In addition, his high school yearbook entry listed him as Keg City Club treasurer along with terms like “boof,” “devil’s triangle,” and “Renate Alumnius.”

Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s decision to come forward was a civic duty for she really doesn’t want a man who put her through the worst time of her life sit on the highest court in the nation. Or at least an FBI investigation to clear her memory which she asked for repeatedly. And I think it’s a reason that should concern us all. After all, statistics show that most incidents of rape and sexual assault go unreported and ignored. And out all reported incidents, only 6% of rapist are subject to any meaningful consequences. Most victims of sexual assault don’t come forward because those who do, often face scrutiny by an unsympathetic crowd, especially if the perpetrator is a pillar in the community, partner, a boss, or family member. Should the assailant have any power, then expect people rallying to defend them. When a woman’s sexually assaulted, people often see her situation as her fault. They say that she’s a slut and shouldn’t be screwing multiple men. They say she shouldn’t have been around men or be so sexually aggressive. They say that she should’ve dressed more modestly or danced less provocatively. They talk about how she drank too much. They remark on how Johnny’s a good boy who’d never go to town on an unconscious woman near a dumpster. Or how Chrissy’s “false” rape accusation is laden with ulterior motives of revenge for not asking her out to the prom. So we can’t have her sexual assault allegation ruin Kevin’s chances of getting into a big name college on a football scholarship. Or how we don’t want
to ruin Damien’s future despite that he tried to force himself on Shelley who’s set for a lifetime of trauma.Many women have faced death threats coming forward. Some have lost their jobs. Some have even faced criminal charges in falsely reporting a crime. Some had family, friends, and community turn against them. Some have had their reputations ruined and received death threats. While others are often ignored by law enforcement as the perpetrator goes on with his life without repercussions. As society teaches girls and women that they’re responsible for preventing rape because boys and men can’t control themselves and that they should accept their egregious behavior as normal, which is utter bullshit and insulting on multiple levels. For if men were truly unable to control their sexual urges, then how could priests remain celibate and husbands be unfaithful to their wives? Thus, it’s glaringly apparent that when they say, “boys will be boys,” they’re telling girls, “don’t expect boys to be responsible for violating you, since they matter more than you. And if they do anything to you that leaves any lasting trauma and suffering that’s not a big deal, it’s your fault. So shut up.” Sexual assault and harassment may be common, but that doesn’t mean it’s normal. And it’s certainly not right.

I have never been sexually assaulted. Mostly because I didn’t go to a lot of parties during my high school and college years. But I’ve been bullied all through my school days. I’ve been sexually harassed on multiple occasions by many immature classmates in middle and high school. And I’ve endured humiliation while many of my fellow schoolmates laughed on. I was constantly told to ignore it despite that I found it impossible. I was often upset that these people didn’t care about my feelings. I was angry that they didn’t listen to me whenever I told them to cut it out or take my pleas seriously. And even if I did tell a teacher about it, I knew it would only be a matter of time they’d start again. To deal with it day after day is often exhausting and frustrating. Fortunately, I wasn’t too traumatized by the whole thing and was glad it all ended by the time I went to college. Yet, I’m sure I have some scars that I had to suffer in silence so as not to draw attention to myself.

Here we have Brett Kavanaugh with his wife during a Fox News damage control interview. Even at this angle, he appears kind of creepy to me.

In addition, I become furious whenever I see a smart capable woman like Hillary Clinton and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford having to put up being bullied by privileged and terrible men who deserve no place in the halls of power. During the presidential debates between Clinton and Donald Trump, I often saw myself in Clinton trying to get her vision across to the American people. Only for Trump to blurt out stupid shit about her dirty laundry and getting all the attention. He clearly had no interest in government policy. He only wanted to take Clinton down in the most humiliating way possible while drowning out whatever she had to say in the media. To see Clinton having to deal with all this shit really makes my blood boil. When I saw Judge Brett Kavanaugh lash out over the sexual assault allegations against him as liberal part to take him down, I was reminded by how many guys have treated me the same way. Seeing the kind of hell Ford had to go through, I believe her. While I was lucky enough not to experience sexual assault, I know what it’s like having people laugh at you when you’re in a state of misery.

With a man like Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court, he can rule on cases relating to sexual assault and other misconduct for decades to come. The fact that he’s already a federal judge is extremely disturbing since he’s in a position of great power and influence. When it comes to sexual assault cases, judges have been especially lenient to white male perpetrators like Steubenville football players and Brock Turner. As a man born into wealth with an Ivy League pedigree and groomed to ascend to the highest court in the land as a conservative ideologue, Kavanaugh perpetuates and benefits from this kind of good-old-boy favoritism in the justice system on sexual assault cases. They may sympathize with these scions and prominent citizens. And thus, may be compelled to give these rich guys a more generous ruling than they deserve. All while having no concern for the women who’ve been harmed in the act and suffer in the legal proceedings with justice denied.

I am used to Supreme Court picks being partisan bloodbaths. But once a nominee is accused of sexual assault and other egregious misbehavior, they are automatically disqualified no questions asked. After all, sexual assault allegations would get you disqualified from many low-income jobs for obvious reasons. The Supreme Court shouldn’t be any different. Obviously, 11 Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee didn’t see it that way and now Judge Brett Kavanaugh has moved to a full Senate confirmation once the FBI investigation is over. Yet, after Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony and Kavanaugh’s explosive temper tantrum, it’s disturbingly clear that these old white men had already made up their minds. They don’t care about whether Kavanaugh has the character to be a fair and impartial judge. They know he’s a conservative hack job who’d give them and their corporate donors favorable rulings on every issue you can imagine. Yet, they can just as easily ask Kavanaugh to withdraw and have Donald Trump nominate another conservative judge who hasn’t sexually assaulted anyone. But no.

The fact Donald Trump bragged about sexual assault and Republicans still elected him president gives you all you need to know about the GOP and sexual harassment and assault. At least when it happens to one of their own. I’m sure they view the sexual assault allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh the same way.

Nevertheless, the Republicans’ willingness to put Judge Brett Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court shows how far they’ve fallen since they’ve embraced Donald Trump as their leader. At some level, Republicans may see sexual harassment and assault as morally wrong. But at another level, they don’t necessarily see it as a big enough deal or problem people should care about. When Trump was caught bragging about sexual assault on that Hollywood Access bus tape, a whole bunch of Republicans abandoned him fearing he was about to lead the party into an electoral disaster. Only to drop the matter entirely as soon as Trump proved his doubters wrong. Not a single Congressional Republican expressed the slightest interest in hearing from Trump’s accusers, looking into their accusations in any way, or otherwise seeking to find the truth of the matter. Republicans can appear appalled when it’s expedient to do so, particularly in regards Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs. But they’ll pretend the whole thing never happened when it serves their interests. And that’s a pattern. When a top Fox News executive was drummed out for covering up so many sexual harassment charges that his ongoing employment was a huge liability, the White House snatched him up. When White House Chief of Staff John Kelly heard that staff secretary Rob Porter abused 2 ex-wives and a former girlfriend, he tried keeping it quiet. When the Federalist Society asked a Republican PR firm to they contracted with to lend someone to Senator Chuck Grassley to run point communications for the Kavanaugh nomination, they sent a guy they knew was a sexual harasser who later quit when it came out. Sexual harassment and assault are things Republicans know they’re supposed to care about. But Republicans in the internal party structure don’t care about them. So they don’t do anything unless public opinion forces their hand. Unless it’s Arizona US Senator Jeff Flake being confronted by 2 sexual assault survivors, most Republicans don’t take sexual assault seriously when the accusations surround one of their own.

Remember, kids, anything you do will be on your permanent record. Also, just because you’re born into wealth and privilege doesn’t mean you’re entitled to a Supreme Court seat. In addition, if you act like this at your job interview, no one’s going to hire you. Still, Judge Brett Kavanaugh burst into fury and viciously denied being the frat boy back in his high school and college days. While being a lying sack of shit who doesn’t take responsibility for his actions and shouldn’t get a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

Yet, what I find most unsettling with Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s character than the sexual assault allegations is how he reacted to them. Not only did he deny sexually assaulting Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, he claimed he didn’t know her. Despite that she testified that she went out with one of his close friend who’s mentioned in his now notorious calendar 13 times. Furthermore, he cast himself as the clean-cut choir boy he wasn’t. Sure he drank, but not to the point where it affected his memory (despite that multiple classmates said he was a heavy drinker and an aggressive drunk, including his former roommate at Yale). And that he could legally drink in Maryland was legal in 1982 (he couldn’t). He may have had inside jokes, but never demeaned women (despite his “Renate Alumnius” entry was a sexist smear on a teenage girl’s promiscuity). While he enjoyed a lively social life, church always came first (though we can’t prove this. Yet, I bet he showed up to Sunday Mass with a hangover). Oh, and he was a virgin in both high school and college (despite that he tried to get into a girl’s pants and may have participated in gang rapes). Now I don’t think heavy drinking and partying during one’s school days isn’t disqualifying for the Supreme Court or any other high office. But not being honest about one’s frat boy past is, given that Kavanaugh has repeatedly lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee as well.

Seeing Judge Brett Kavanaugh being denied a Supreme Court seat will set a powerful example to young men that actions have real consequences. And that sexual conduct without consent is not okay. But seeing that Republicans want to confirm him regardless of whether the allegations are true, I have good reason to worry that won’t happen. Because when it comes to sexual harassment and assault allegations against fellow Republicans, Republicans don’t care.

But more disturbingly, Judge Brett Kavanaugh called the circus around his sexual assault allegations, “a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.” Obviously, he doesn’t acknowledge his drinking or the harm he might’ve inflicted on Ford’s life. He said these words with the entitled vicious rage of an alcoholic guy who’s used to getting his own way. And now he’s just learning like the rest of us did a long time ago that life isn’t fair and he can’t stand that. Furthermore, he’s a Trump-like partisan who feels entitled to say and do whatever he wants, uses emotional bullying and intimidation to get his way, and who doesn’t take responsibility for his actions. Whether Kavanaugh is confirmed or not, a large share of the American public will never trust him as impartial. While most will continue to see him as the privileged, arrogant, and self-righteous prick he’s revealed himself to be. The US Senate must not confirm this unrepentant asshole to our nation’s highest court. For like America Ferrera, I am sick of seeing capable, intelligent, and credible women come up against whiny, incompetent men-children and be suppressed. The matter of Kavanaugh’s confirmation isn’t just a vote. But rather a referendum of who we are as a nation. What are we willing to accept and where are we, really? And how much longer will women’s lives and dignity be secondary to the needs of powerful men? Confirming Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court will send the wrong message to women and girls that their concerns don’t matter. His nomination must not continue any further.

On Friday, September 20, 2018, the New York Times reported that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said he wanted to record conversations with Donald Trump in 2017. He also discussed using the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. He also talked about wearing a wire to catch him on tape. Though Rosenstein denied the report, one source told the Times he was being sarcastic. Eventually neither was carried out. The Times report was primarily based on anonymous source accounts and contemporaneous Andrew McCabe memo descriptions.

On Monday, September 24, 2018, news came that Rod Rosenstein’s position as deputy attorney general is now facing an uncertain future. Initial reports said he resigned or got fired, which was later debunked. As of now, it’s expected that Rosenstein will meet with Donald Trump to discuss his future with the Department of Justice. But the deputy attorney general expects to be fired. At any rate, the deputy attorney general’s possible departure is significant. Due to Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ recusal from the Russia probe over lying to Congress about his Russian contacts, Rosenstein was responsible for overseeing Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.

• According to court testimony, Mueller’s team has admitted to informing Rosenstein of all major decisions in advance, and that he’d have authority to overrule them.
• Rosenstein approved Mueller’s assembly of an all-star team that totaled 17 prosecutors at its height.
• In August 2017, Rosenstein wrote a memo to Mueller listing many people and topics he was authorized to investigate. The publicly released version is heavily redacted.
• Rosenstein held press conferences announcing Mueller’s 2 major indictments of Russians for election interference like the February social media indictment and the July email hacking indictment.
• Rosenstein was also reportedly involved in Mueller’s decision to refer an investigation into Michael Cohen to federal prosecutors in Manhattan, resulting in Cohen’s guilty plea to tax, bank fraud, and campaign finance violations in August.

Furthermore, Rosenstein has helped to preemptively protect Mueller from firing by testifying that regulation under which he appointed the special counsel gives him to send him on his way. So it’s clear that a Trump order to fire Mueller would be legally dubious.
For over a year, Rod Rosenstein has had to walk a delicate tightrope. On one hand, he was committed to protecting the investigation from conservatives inside and outside Congress who believed it biased against Donald Trump and urged him to fire the special counsel. Yet, Rosenstein couldn’t champion the investigation too much or else he’d draw Trump’s ire. In other words, he had to keep both sides happy as they constantly went at each other’s throats. During a House Judiciary Committee hearing in December 2017 over the Strzok-Page exchanges, Rosenstein defended the texts’ release to satisfy the anti-Mueller Republicans, saying “We consulted with the inspector general to determine that he had no objection to releasing the material. If he had, we would not have released it.” Yet, Rosenstein also defended Mueller when asked whether he’d fire him. He replied, “If there were good cause, I would act. If there were no good cause, I would not. It would’ve been difficult to find anyone more qualified for this job.” Yet, keeping both sides happy allowed Rosenstein to claim support for his staff while also backing Donald Trump. It’s not a glamorous job but if he’s gone many fear Rosenstein might be replaced with a Trump crony who’d rein in the probe or even shut it down completely.

The current deputy attorney general’s potential departure strikes at the Trump-Russia investigation’s heart. Because Mueller had to run major investigative decisions past him. Rosenstein’s temporary replacement, Solicitor General Noel Francisco, could simply refuse to approve Mueller’s requests, effectively slowing the investigation to a crawl. Or he could fire Mueller outright if he felt there was a reason to do so. Rod Rosenstein refused to do that. Instead, he allowed Mueller’s probe to proceed unimpeded while Mueller indicted top Trump campaign officials. The Mueller probe’s future and perhaps even that of Trump’s presidency once depended on how well Rosenstein performed this delicate balancing act.

Those who worked for him have long characterized Rod Rosenstein as an apolitical straight shooter who doesn’t put up with bullshit and always tries to be fair. Appointed as a US attorney for Maryland by President George W. Bush in 2005 and kept on by President Barack Obama, he joined the Trump administration with broad bipartisan support at his confirmation. Sure, he and Jeff Sessions wrote a letter calling of the firing of FBI Director James Comey for his actions against Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election. However, it turns out that Rosenstein isn’t a man without bias. Since his bias tends to be for the rule of law and country over party or anyone in the White House. But he made up for it by hiring Robert Mueller as special counsel, and authorizing him to look into possible Trump-Russia ties as well as “any matters that arose or may arise from the investigation.” He didn’t stop Mueller from pursuing the investigation the way he saw fit. And he made every indication that he intended to keep letting Mueller proceed with his probe.

Nonetheless, Donald Trump has publicly and privately raged about the Russia probe and his Justice Department for months. Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein have been his ire’s frequent targets. Trump has repeatedly complained that the Russia investigation is a “witch hunt,” that “flipping” witnesses (like Michael Flynn, Rick Gates, and Paul Manafort) should be illegal, and that the Justice Department isn’t doing enough to investigate Democrats like Hillary Clinton and isn’t personally loyal to him. As a result, Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress and in conservative media have joined him in this effort as well, training criticism on Sessions and Rosenstein. Hardline House conservatives have even threatened to force a vote on Rosenstein’s impeachment based on paper thin pretexts before eventually backing down. So the fear of Trump firing Rosenstein and replacing him with a kiss-ass crony that could either slow down the Mueller probe or shut it down entirely is well-justified.

But if Rod Rosenstein is fired or resigns, Solicitor General Noel Francisco can change all that, especially if Donald Trump throws enough Twitter tantrums to give significant pressure. Firing Robert Mueller may not completely undermine the investigation. Since 5 Trump associates have pleaded guilty and prosecutors are likely to follow leads from the investigation’s beginning in June 2016. The future is still unclear. But if Francisco doesn’t do Trump’s bidding, Trump could fire him, which can be more detrimental to Mueller’s probe and be in the making of a Saturday night massacre. A new deputy attorney general could effectively cripple the Mueller probe by rejecting his requests to investigate more people, get new evidence, or pursue more charges against more people of interests. In effect, Rosenstein’s potential ouster puts Mueller’s investigation in its most precarious position to date, possibly allowing Donald Trump, his family, and associates to escape further scrutiny. And considering the horrible stuff Trump and his swamp cronies have done, our country can’t face this.